Szerkesztővita:Tacsipacsi

A Wikiforrásból
Ugrás a navigációhoz Ugrás a kereséshez

Értesítés törlési megbeszélésről[szerkesztés]

Szia! Értesítlek, hogy a Wikiforrás:Szavazás_törlésről lapon az alábbi két törlési javaslatot tettem:

  • Javaslat üres kategórialapok törlésére
  • Javaslat üres szerzői lapok törlésére

Kb. 20–20 db régi lap törléséről van szó. Ha van róla véleményed, kérlek, ott írd le. Köszönettel: Vadaro (vita) 2016. február 16., 14:34 (CET)

"Empty" categoties[szerkesztés]

The user categories you are deleting after recreation are actually not empty. However their contents is not up-to-date: updating it requires purging/editing appropriate user pages or waiting up to a month for automatic update. Ankry (vita) 2018. szeptember 26., 14:55 (CEST)

@Ankry: I’ve manually checked each and every category before deletion. They were empty at that time. (Yes, even the one I deleted this morning.) I mean under “empty category” a category that shows no pages. So you’re right, their content was not up-to-date, as non-exist content cannot be up-to-date. I don’t think I should know of and work around software bugs as a local admin—it’s a bug if an extension creates a category without making sure the appropriate pages will appear there. However, the one month passed before the first deletion: for example, Kategória:User rn was first created in July 2017 and I first deleted it in next January. This is true for all the other categories I checked of those which were deleted in January (I opened around a dozen out of the 56, randomly selected), except that many of them were created in June, not July.
I also have a question: why are proofreading texts you don’t understand, especially using Polish edit summaries? I think proofreading should be done by someone who speaks the language. You can contribute (using Hungarian edit summaries, or English if you can’t get them in Hungarian), but please do not press the “proofread” button. The text can be used equally well if it is marked as not proofread, but it shows that it should be proofread by someone who speaks Hungarian. —Tacsipacsi (vita) 2018. szeptember 26., 20:17 (CEST)
The pages in theese categories were not displayed because of delay in processing categorylinks in MediaWiki. This is a well-known bug/feature and may be observed sometimes eg. in Wikimedia Commons when either servers are busy or changes are dependent on some automatic processing (not on direct wikicode modifications). I used a bot to purge all pages in User (Szerkesztővita) namespace to enforce MediaWiki to update category links (no righs are required for that). It seems that Babel AutoUpdate recognizes the category links in use pages even if the pages are not automatically displayed (generally such links are "visible" on appropriate user pages, but not in a category).
The edit summaries are automatically set basing on user language interface. This ia a ProofreadPage extension feature.
I have just choosen to process one book per wikisource to:
  • become more familiar with techniques used in various Wikisources
  • check how difficult is it to verify text in a language one does knot know.
I am trying to verify the text with the scan literally, finding some OCR errors (like j/], ü/ű, ö/ő, Ë/É, etc; likely not all). But if you wish, I will not mark the pages as proofread. Of course, I am unable to identify typographic errors. I also added pure OCR to some pages that were missing OCR. How to mark them then? Problematic? Unlike other pages created by me, they are not formatted/verified at all. I have also some suggestion concerning your wiki ProofreadPage configuration, but I will write about this here.
Also, I am not sure if I have time to finish work on this book and if you wish not to continue, I will go away. Ankry (vita) 2018. szeptember 26., 20:52 (CEST)
@Ankry: Sometimes I come across with cases when cache is not purged fast enough—but for half a year (more than a year for now)? It’s really abnormal.
Then it’s a bug in ProofreadPage, it should use the content language. (A workaround is to use the content language as the interface language. I do so everywhere except for multilingual wikis, and it’s not so hard—everything is at the same place, only the texts differ.)
I think the best would be not proofread for texts corrected but not checked (because you don’t speak the language) and problematic for raw OCR output, although this seems to not be the scheme for already-existing pages.
I have nothing against editing in languages one doesn’t speak in general, I’ve edited the French Wikipedia for example a lot, although fr-0.5 would be a huge lie in my Babel box. So keep up with editing if you would like, I just ask you to not mark pages as proofread. —Tacsipacsi (vita) 2018. szeptember 27., 00:34 (CEST)
OK, no problem for me.
Cache purge jobs are sometimes lost for unknown reason. I thing this is a hard to identify mediawiki bug. I've seen thumbnails on Commons that after a year still showed an earlier (overwritten) image version. I think, theese categories may just need some attention. Ankry (vita) 2018. szeptember 27., 00:44 (CEST)

word hyphenation[szerkesztés]

Concerning [1], just FYI: unsure if you have read this notyfication. You can discuss it here if your community disagree. Ankry (vita) 2018. október 5., 16:52 (CEST)

@Ankry: Yes, I had read the VP message, actually this is why I deleted the hyphen. The community won’t disagree, simply because there’s no community at all here; there were hardly any edits in the last month except for mines, yours and one other editor’s (who made his first edit ever last Friday). —Tacsipacsi (vita) 2018. október 5., 18:38 (CEST)

Oldal:Ossendowski - Ázsiai titkok, ázsiai emberek.djvu/17[szerkesztés]

Under high magnification I see page No. 13 here (with extra ink blot in the upper part; but the bottom is clearly 3 for me). Ankry (vita) 2018. október 17., 08:53 (CEST)

@Ankry: I cannot see the 3 in that character, but I restored it, simply because it should be 13 between the 12th and the 14th page. —Tacsipacsi (vita) 2018. október 17., 23:53 (CEST)

external links[szerkesztés]

Hi, maybe it is worth to add some limits for external links on userpages/user talk pages to make spambot "life" harder? See https://hu.wikisource.org/wiki/Szerkeszt%C5%91:LuccaSilveira7 and https://hu.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Szerkeszt%C5%91:LuccaSilveira7&action=history Ankry (vita) 2019. február 9., 11:36 (CET)

@Ankry: Maybe. But two or three links are absolutely acceptable on a user page, for example one wants to link their personal home page, their university’s website and their employer (especially if it’s relevant for the project, like a GLAM institute), so the limit must be not lower than 10 or 15 links, maybe even higher. – Tacsipacsi (vita) 2019. február 9., 15:58 (CET)
Look at the earlier versions of the page: it is a clear spambot (unless a real person may have 3 various birth dates). And I would suggest to allow such links for users with other contribution (not only editing own userpage). Ankry (vita) 2019. február 9., 16:07 (CET)
@Ankry: I don’t think it’s a spambot—editing the page again and again seems a human behavior. This very user is lying, of course, and should not be here, but even starting wiki career with creating user page seems logical to me. My user page, for example, was among my first ten edits. There were no user page edits here in the last month, but the last user page creation (apart from user subpages) on huwiki was w:Szerkesztő:Mihály64, the user’s first edit. Isn’t it legitimate? (Yeah, it doesn’t contain any external links, but it could.) – Tacsipacsi (vita) 2019. február 9., 16:27 (CET)
There is a way to recognize most spambots. I emailed details to you. Ankry (vita) 2019. február 10., 00:40 (CET)